Re: [HACKERS][PATCH] adding simple sock check for windows

CharSyam <charsyam(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> [ simple_check.patch ]

This is a good catch. However, it looks to me like the reason nobody
has noticed a problem here is that actually, this error test is useless;
we can never get here with a bad connection, because connectDatabase
would have failed. I'm inclined to think we should just delete the whole
if-statement, instead.

BTW, I tried cross-checking for other errors of this ilk by doing

diff --git a/src/include/port.h b/src/include/port.h
index a514ab758b..9ba6a0df79 100644
--- a/src/include/port.h
+++ b/src/include/port.h
@@ -28,9 +28,9 @@

/* socket has a different definition on WIN32 */
#ifndef WIN32
-typedef int pgsocket;
+typedef unsigned int pgsocket;

-#define PGINVALID_SOCKET (-1)
+#define PGINVALID_SOCKET ((pgsocket) -1)
#else
typedef SOCKET pgsocket;

and then compiling with a compiler that would warn about "unsigned int < 0"
tests (I used Apple's current compiler, but probably any recent clang
would do as well). It found this case and no others, which is good.
This is not a 100% cross-check, because I don't think it would notice
"unsigned int == -1" which is another way somebody might misspell the
test, and it definitely would not catch cases where somebody stored a
socket identifier in plain int instead of pgsocket. But it's better
than nothing...

regards, tom lane